Problem with 6 noded pentagon from CGNS

[markcmiller86]

We're trying to combine visit-users email list with GitHub issues.
When replying on visit-users, please reply only to emails with a Subject
line that includes [visit-dav/live-customer-response].

---

User reports...

Actually, I found that Vsit is having issues reading CGNS 4.x files (based on examples given in CGNS's source code). I've created this issue on Visit's github page.
For now, I'm using v3.4.1 and I'm having no issues with Visit.

On another note, starting from the HEX_8 unstructured grid example, I am trying to write a simple PENTA_6 unstructured grid with only 1 element so far (following node ordering on from this user guide). However, the visualization part with Visit does not seem correct. In light of the previous issue with Visit, I am not sure whether my code or Visit is wrong here.
I've attached my (very simple) script as well for one PENTA_6 element. Am I missing something?

grid_unstruct_penta6.cgns.gz

[markcmiller86]

I am puzzled by what is not correct in the attached image. It sure looks correct to me. Is maybe the bounding box annotation throwing off your interpretation? If so, go to Controls->Anntoations and click the No annotations button and then hit the Apply button and see if that doesn't make it easier to interpret.

[markcmiller86]

Hi Solal, Wasn't sure if you saw this response... "Mark C. Miller" wrote: I am puzzled by what is not correct in the attached image. It sure looks correct to me. Is maybe the bounding box annotation throwing off your interpretation? If so, go to Controls->Anntoations and click the No annotations button and then hit the Apply button and see if that doesn't make it easier to interpret. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/visit-dav/live-customer-response/issues/26#issuecomment-608022837>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABLUUZED2H3MJOX4X3KYRHDRKTJAXANCNFSM4L2YFEMQ>.

[markcmiller86]

Closing for lack of response.